The Trump administration talking smack about transferring ownership of Greenland and how the transfer would happen. What is the real goal? Is this just forcing a conversation starter or is there another end game?
But Europe has been too chickenshit to challenge Russia in the Ukraine. Gotta wonder if this sudden burst of testosterone to challenge a superpower is real.
Hey, Guy, it's the Europeans who have mainly been supporting Ukraine mostly, lately. British intelligence has been in Ukraine from the start, providing support. British mercs have died there. The French and British are about to send peacekeepers to Ukraine, if a ceasefire is reached.
The US is great at saying it's won wars it's lost, lately, have you noticed? Some "superpower"! Also, Russia has more nukes than the US has, did you know that? Were you expecting the Europeans to just walk blindly into a thermonuclear holocaust?
Yes, I had forgotten that Europe, along with the US has given Ukraine a lot of assistance.
But now Europe is saying “shoot to kill” a US invasion. That’s a more aggressive stance. Since you’re counting nukes, the US has a lot more than Denmark and Europe as a whole.
Let me ask you the same question, do you think Europe will walk into a thermonuclear holocaust over Greenland? Plus, there are large numbers of US troops stationed in Europe. That raises the stakes.
It's an interesting question, Guy. Between them, France and Britain have about 550 nukes, the US has about 5000, but only about a third are actually deployed and operational. The total operational, deployed French and British operational deployment is about 400. So, while the US does have four times the number of deployed nukes as France and Britain combined, 400 H-bombs is more than enough to completely destroy the US, probably forever.
The US troops in Europe would have no chance against the local nations and populations, who could simply starve them out. In the case of war, they would effectively be hostages. There are only 80,000 troops there, in a population of hundreds of millions of people, with their own sizable militaries.
I'd bet most countries will lie and try to make more in secret. But we can estimate how many they have by how much uranium and other materials are out there. Then again who knows about that.
Log in
The Trump administration talking smack about transferring ownership of Greenland and how the transfer would happen. What is the real goal? Is this just forcing a conversation starter or is there another end game?
With Trump, I believe this is a conversation starter. Trump is good at getting attention.
Trump is good at breaking laws and killing people. People like you make money off it.
Lots of bluster from both sides.
But Europe has been too chickenshit to challenge Russia in the Ukraine. Gotta wonder if this sudden burst of testosterone to challenge a superpower is real.
Hey, Guy, it's the Europeans who have mainly been supporting Ukraine mostly, lately. British intelligence has been in Ukraine from the start, providing support. British mercs have died there. The French and British are about to send peacekeepers to Ukraine, if a ceasefire is reached.
The US is great at saying it's won wars it's lost, lately, have you noticed? Some "superpower"! Also, Russia has more nukes than the US has, did you know that? Were you expecting the Europeans to just walk blindly into a thermonuclear holocaust?
Yes, I had forgotten that Europe, along with the US has given Ukraine a lot of assistance.
But now Europe is saying “shoot to kill” a US invasion. That’s a more aggressive stance. Since you’re counting nukes, the US has a lot more than Denmark and Europe as a whole.
Let me ask you the same question, do you think Europe will walk into a thermonuclear holocaust over Greenland? Plus, there are large numbers of US troops stationed in Europe. That raises the stakes.
It's an interesting question, Guy. Between them, France and Britain have about 550 nukes, the US has about 5000, but only about a third are actually deployed and operational. The total operational, deployed French and British operational deployment is about 400. So, while the US does have four times the number of deployed nukes as France and Britain combined, 400 H-bombs is more than enough to completely destroy the US, probably forever.
The US troops in Europe would have no chance against the local nations and populations, who could simply starve them out. In the case of war, they would effectively be hostages. There are only 80,000 troops there, in a population of hundreds of millions of people, with their own sizable militaries.
Do we really know exact numbers of nukes each country has, that'd seem like classified info. How many does Israel have?
Israel refuses to confirm or deny nukes. Nukes are subject to control by treaties for most nations, so their numbers must be made public.
I see ok
I'd bet most countries will lie and try to make more in secret. But we can estimate how many they have by how much uranium and other materials are out there. Then again who knows about that.
Who knows about anything?